09-23-2022 09:52 AM
How does Bob's solution stand up to the "golden" VI?
09-23-2022 10:04 AM
Here (bottom) is alternative code that gives the same (probably incorrect!!!) result as the code by constructionworker (top).
Arguably slightly simpler 😄
09-23-2022 10:10 AM
wiebe@CARYA wrote:
This seems to give the same results as the presumably working example.
At least for the 5 values I've tested:
Thanks for your answer.
This seems to work. 🙂
I almost started banging my head against the walls.
At least according to the chart here it looks error free.
I waited for a while and was able to better describe the problem once I understood what was required. I think the bird's nest helped explain the situation better 🙂
09-23-2022 10:10 AM
wiebe@CARYA wrote:
@altenbach wrote:
wiebe@CARYA wrote:
At least for the 5 values I've tested:
Well, In this case it is simple to do an exhaustive analysis of all 360x360 possible inputs. For at least 1/8th of the samples, there is a difference in the "send to motor" command. I doubt any version is actually correct. 😄
Not that it helps, but I think the Current input isn't limited to 0 or 360, it can be anything...
Yes, but it can always be Q&R'd into 0..259. It is safe to say that if your version (I am not going to use the word "solution" for anything posted here! 😄 ) differs in the shown range, it is not the same.
We can easily expand the exhaustive 2D test for a much wider range of one of the inputs.
09-23-2022 11:14 AM
Me trying to follow this thread-